This claim seems like another lying lie to me because it probably uses a deceptive basis of comparison. Usually, and in this case, it is the rate that matters, not the overall amount. Has anyone who's made this claim actually used a rate? I doubt it, and until you can link to an article that does so, you have not proven it and it remains a lying lie you're spreading. There could easily be more journalists dying in Gaza because there are more journalists there than journalists who go to other conflicts. (Seems almost certainly to be the case, by far. This conflict gets more attention by far than any other in the world.) The proper point of comparison isn't the overall number of journalists killed, but rather, what is the percentage of journalists killed in Gaza? How does that percentage compare with the percentage of journalists killed in another conflict in a dense urban environment where one side uses their population as a human shield and deliberately targets civilians?